FlyingMonkey Posted December 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 I think the Sport Pilot rating would wither, assuming that student pilots for a PP would not require a medical. It would make no sense to not allow student pilots to fly without a medical while permitting certificated pilots to do so, but the feds should never be credited with an over abundance of sense. However, in this circumstance there is nothing wrong with SP dying off. It has proven the viability of the driver's license medical -- to my knowledge there has not been a single fatal accident of a pilot flying under a DL that was the result of pilot medical issues, in the eight years of the Sport Pilot rules. The LSA aircraft would continue to exist, and may even still be built in increasing numbers as the ASTM standards are cheaper and easier to meet than the part 23 certification, even under the proposed changes. After all, there will always be a market for two seat, 110-120 knot airplanes with a 500lb+ useful load. I for one would probably not trade in my CT for something bigger if this rules change goes through. The CT meets my mission, so there would be no need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted December 17, 2013 Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 There is also the issue of Light Sport Repairman and being able to do inspections and repairs. (I don't think this bill will actually end up going anywhere. We are very premature in assessing this. It has not even been taken up in committee yet.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 It would be interesting to see how many people currently flying LSA are doing so because they want to, but could easily get a medical, and how many are doing so because they can't or don't want to get a medical for fear of losing it later. I think that might be a good predictor of how well Sport PIlot will do if this new law is enacted in some significant way. I would be one of those. I'm 49, in good health (knock on wood) and can easily pass a medical exam. Having said that, I went Sport Pilot because it allowed me to fulfill my mission (fair weather burger chasing on a nice day and never with a deadline) without messing around with medical. Why was I turned off by medical when I'm healthy? I have too many friends who are a bit older than me and are forever screwing around trying to keep their medical current. Health can change, so I didn't want to put myself in the position 10 years from now. If medicals are no longer required I'll immediately upgrade my license to Private Pilot, continue to fly VFR, daytime, good weather only but will now be able to fly a little larger and carry more than 1 passenger. Makes a new FD C4 look even better! (or a used Cirrus SR/20, or Vans RV10). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 There is also the issue of Light Sport Repairman and being able to do inspections and repairs. (I don't think this bill will actually end up going anywhere. We are very premature in assessing this. It has not even been taken up in committee yet.) It's like playing the lotto... fun to daydream! I will say that general aviation has a pretty good bi-partisan (rare these days) group in Congress. Most folks once a bill gets to the floor find these bills non controversial and tend to pass them. This bill does have both R's and D's sponsoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted December 18, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I'm in the same boat as Adam. 47 years old, and could get a medical. I chose not to because: 1) Day VFR at 80-120 knots with two seats fits my mission. 2) I don't like interacting with feds, so this is one less opportunity for them to annoy me. 3) I like the concept of smaller, more affordable (it's all relative) airplanes increasing access to aviation, and want to support that. Not everybody dreams of flying a PC-12 at 300kt in the flight levels... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Call me a late bloomer. I got my PPL shortly before birthday 70 and my instrument rating shortly there after. Several years ago (shortly before birthday 80) I decided to forgo med and go Sport priv. With high blood pressure, well controlled with meds. I could pass but the documentation, extra tests and possible deferment to OK resulting in several months grounding while waiting for answer seemed like too much. Good bye 182 and hello CTSW. I still practice under the hood, in case I need a standard rate 180 deg. Being retired IFR isn't a real problem, whats an extra night in a motel (if they have a pool and pub). I do miss the back seat on occasion, but would probably stick with the CT. Maybe rent a 172 on occasion. Love the A/C and it's panel, have taken it from Fla. to NY and back several times. Six pack works, but glass is more fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GravityKnight Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 If the FAA allows pilots to fly four-seaters, or up to 6,000 lbs aircraft with a drivers license for a medical, then there is no reason to get a Sports Pilot rating and restrict yourself to 1320. Sport Pilot will go bye bye. So what? It's just a plastic card... hurting LSAs would be a bummer, but I don't even see that being a big issue as others have mentioned. Some only need 2 seats and 5gph on cheap fuel is worth a lot!! I want this to happen, so I have the option of flying larger stuff, but I'm still planning to buy a Light Sport. I know quite a few guys who got their private and still rent the CT's because they are affordable and fun. I honestly don't see any real negatives to this idea.. I really hope it happens. I'm 30 and healthy, and could pass a 3rd class but didn't want to deal with the hassle. This would open some doors and allow for more learning, plane selection etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I wonder if CTs would disappear from the rental market since without the Sport license training need most schools would go the route of a plane that could be used more broadly in training. There is only one place locally I could rent an LSA and it is a Cessna dealer. Once the Skycatcher wears out, I don't think it will be replaced. I don't know of any other SLSAs in a large area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 2 CTLS on the Ohio State University Airport. Been doing this for years. The CTs compete with diamonds, bonanzas, technams, piper sports, cessnas, mooneys, etc. For many, the CTLS is a favorite. If they are trying to haul a lot of stuff, they will use a bigger plane. Many just fly around in state and they go for the CTs. Very often, people see sport pilot as a way to get a license right now, then get private at a later date. More often than not, when I talk to customers, they still don't know about the medical requirements or the DL medical for sport. They just like the way the CTs look, and the shorter hour requirements. If the DL medical gets expanded, we will see a little bit of a drop in use of CTs for the few that can't pass a regular medical, but we don't really advertise LSA for the purpose of skating the medical, we advertise it as a recreational escape, and as a stepping stone for private if people want to switch down the road. Most people don't actually know what their needs are until they need them. Until they figure out what their needs are, I often tell them to just fly the CTs for now, and when they have it nailed down what they want, they can go for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted December 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 Edit: In my many years of flying, "interacting with the feds" to get a medical is a non-issue if you're healthy and not on any disqualifying medications. For me it's a philosophical issue more than a medical or logistical issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 My sentiments also, MovingOn. (I know I should have your name, but I don't.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted December 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 I'm not anti-government, I am pro appropriate government. I'm not going to derail this thread, so I will say no more about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 Politics aside, I do think that the Third Class Medical is unnecessary for pilots who fly for reasons other than furtherance of a business. The EAA/AOPA proposal and the newly introduced bill in congress to make more planes available to the pilot with a driver's license medical are completely appropriate. Opposition is without empirical justification. I suspect most on this site agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 I've had to kick out a couple people like that CTLSi. It sucks because it crushes them, but better emotionally than physically! Sadly though, some of the people who are that bad don't care about authority anyways. There's a couple old guys in the northeastern end of the midwest who had expired (one had revoked) medicals and still chose to fly. The guy with the revoked medical just basically flipped off the FAA and kept flying. The thing is, the FAA can't actually touch someone unless they break a law (the FAA regs are not actually laws!), so they were sending him fines all the time, and he just basically tore them up and trashed them. It wasn't until his plane, which was severely lacking maintenance upkeep, crashed into a city road, damaging cars and asphalt, that the state filed charges and handed jurisdiction to the FAA. (I believe it was in Michigan, it's been a while since I read the article. Was a long time ago)\ In Ohio, we have a law that states that people have to follow FAA regs, so breaking a reg is breaking a state law, and jurisdiction is immediately handed off to the FAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 On the other hand I had a guy, about 35, with a PPL and a current medical who was a successful person in his field. He was transitioning into a plane he was unfamiliar with. Couldn't tell him anything. Long story short, he killed himself and girlfriend in a C-180 on floats on a weather day after being advised by more than one person not to go. Fortunately I had distanced myself from him well prior to the event so none of it rolled my way. Point is, medical or not, old or young, are not necessarily the defining factors. You can't fix stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 Hi John, You can't fix stupid. I can fix it with my handy dandy Dremel tool with a cut off blade. It can fix anything even perform a lobotomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted December 20, 2013 Report Share Posted December 20, 2013 Speaking of CFI renewal, I've got to renew mine pretty soon. I don't use it much anymore but failing to renew is not an option. In the meantime I'd better stay away from Roger!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 26, 2015 Report Share Posted August 26, 2015 Just got off the phone with the FAA. Looks like the recension of the medical requirement will go through in 18-24 months. It will include everything under 6000 lbs, twins and all others and multi passenger. It looks to also include night and IFR. It stops at the commercial pilot rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted August 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2015 Just got off the phone with the FAA. Looks like the recension of the medical requirement will go through in 18-24 months. It will include everything under 6000 lbs, twins and all others and multi passenger. It looks to also include night and IFR. It stops at the commercial pilot rating. There was a rumor that the amended bill stated you must have held a medical within the ten years prior to the bill's enactment or any time after to qualify for DL medical privileges. Do you know if that turd provision will make it in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 26, 2015 Report Share Posted August 26, 2015 No I don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 But, wouldn't a plane like, say, an RV-9 with an O-320 throttled back to 5 GPH on Mogas be about 20 knots or more faster?? Just saying....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbigs Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 As I said in another thread, there is no medical requirement for a CFI. There is only a medical requirement for the commercial rating. If you are acting as a Sport Pilot PIC, then you can use your full CFI, and CFII abilities. A CFIS (CFI Sport) does not need a medical. But a CFIS without a private pilot license and a current medical cannot complete the training of a Sport Pilot because they cannot act as a safety pilot for the under hood work. A small glitch, true...but one a student should consider before selecting a trainer. That same restriction applies to training Private Pilots...no under hood work can be done unless the CFI/CFII acting as safety pilot is at least a private pilot with current medical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Pilot Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 I'm not sure that is correct. A safety pilot must be qualified to act as PIC. A CFI or Sport Pilot Instructor is qualified to act as PIC with a driver's license in LSA. I think this is an example of where all the regs have not been completely harmonized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 A CFIS (CFI Sport) does not need a medical. But a CFIS without a private pilot license and a current medical cannot complete the training of a Sport Pilot because they cannot act as a safety pilot for the under hood work. A small glitch, true...but one a student should consider before selecting a trainer. That same restriction applies to training Private Pilots...no under hood work can be done unless the CFI/CFII acting as safety pilot is at least a private pilot with current medical. Once again you are only partly correct. A subpart K flight instructor who does not hold a private pilot certificate can not provide the instrument training required by 61.93, (e), (12). If they hold a private pilot certificate then they can provide the training. Any sport CFI who is at least a private pilot or regular CFI can provide instrument training for sport or private pilot students in a light sport aircraft without a medical, as long as it is done in day VFR conditions. http://sportpilottraining.sportaviationcenter.com/instructors-cfi-cfis/sport-cfi-endorsement/ Here is a little clip from his website. "The CFI with expired medical and a CFIS can give instrument training in a LSA required by 61.93 (e)(12) before a student cross country if it has the required equipment as long as they are in day VMC." The reason a CFIS with a sport pilot rating can not give the training is because they likely never had any instrument training them selves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 If the bill modifies the cruise limits on sport planes like ctls I wonder whether the neg flap setting could be modified to increase speed.I am also curious to hear from the experts as to what useful load could be accomadated in the ctls.It seems when I am loaded to the gills I dont sense any significant difference in flying characteristics.Of course ,I would never overload my plane but it feels lile the limitations are born from the legal restrictions not necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.